The present invention, in some embodiments thereof, relates to computer implemented methods, computer programs and systems for converting graphical representations of activity flows to human readable textual representations and, more specifically, but not exclusively, to computer implemented methods, computer programs and systems for converting graphical representations of activity flows to human readable nested-lists.
An activity flow is a set of related, structured processes producing a specific service and/or product, as well as the relationships between these activities. The relationships are often described as a sequence and/or a hierarchy with or without decision points. Decision points can be based on external data, user preferences and/or data in the process.
Business entities often model their activity flows. Such models assist business entities with diverse activities: Improving existing processes, Examining processes across lines of business to discover which one is the best of breed in entities merging, Automating processes, and Complying with government regulations requiring activity flows documentation to name a few.
Activity flow models can be roughly classified as graphical and non-graphical representations. A graphical representation may be a flowchart, a mathematic graph having nodes and edges, a bar graph, a topological chart, a process matrix and/or the likes. Some of these representations, for example, a mathematic graph, are more commonly used in conjunction with an activity flow. A non graphical activity flow model can be text-based. The text can be structured or unstructured.
Editing tools for modeling activity flows benefit from offering both graphical and non-graphical representations. Editing tools are frequently utilized for modeling activity flows. Generation of activity flow models is typically a shared effort performed by multiple stakeholders within a business entity. Different stakeholders posse different knowledge elements and expertise required for modeling an activity flow. Such collaborative efforts benefit from editing tools' assistance. The preferred representation of activity flow models varies between the stakeholders. The preferred representation is typically correlated with the stakeholder's proficiency. For example, technology savvy users, which are familiar with the graph metaphor, tend to prefer a mathematic graph representation. On the other hand, professionals in their domain (e.g., physicians), are typically not used to working with a graph metaphor, but are costumed to interacting with text editors. Such professionals usually tend to prefer a textual based representation. Editing tools for modeling activity flows catering to both of these needs include dual representations: graphical and non-graphical. Such dual representations require conversion between the graphical and the non-graphical representation and vice versa.
Converting an activity flow's graphical representation to a non-graphical representation is not a straight forward task. There is no direct equivalence between graphical representations and non-graphical representations. Instead, alternative conversion methodologies exist. Consequently, dissimilar non-graphical representations may be generated for the same graphical representation of an activity flow. This challenge increases with the complexity of the modeled activity flow's sequence. Some alternative conversion methodologies pose challenges such as conversion consistency. For example, the original graphical representation may differ from the re-conversion result obtained after converting the non-graphical representation back to a graphical representation.
Despite the above mentioned challenges in round-trip conversion between graphical and non-graphical representations of activity flows, tools for editing both graphical and non-graphical activity flow models exist. Among them are: IBM® WebSphere Business Modeler®, IBM® Business Process Management® (BPM), IBM® WebShere Lombardi edition, SAP NetWeaver BPM, Appian BPM Suite, TIBCO BPM.
The above mentioned tools, as well as other tools which capture activity flow models, employ different formats for graphical representations. These include Business Process Model and Notation (BPMN), XML Process Definition Language (XPDL) and Business Process Execution Language (BPEL).
The above mentioned tools, as well as other tools capturing activity flow models, employ structured text for non-graphical representations. Several formats are utilized for capturing and displaying structured text. These formats include Extensible Markup Language (XML), XML Process Definition Language (XPDL) and Business Process Execution Language for Web Services (BPEL4WS). XPDL is a format standardized by the Workflow Management Coalition (WfMC) to interchange activity flow definitions between different modeling tools. XPDL supplements an XML schema with process oriented elements. BPEL4WS combines Web services Flow Language (WSFL), which provides support for graph oriented processes, and XML language (XLANG), which has structural constructs for processes, into one package that supports implementation of an activity flow.